D850 or Z-series?

[lindsay]

Seeing as I'm expecting to be a bit flush soon, I'm toying with adding one more beast to my GAS collection. I have a D500 but with a few full-frame lenses, bought in anticipation of going ff at some point. I'm not interested in changing brand nor replacing glass, and indeed I' pretty much decided on a D850 given current prices, but I am just wondering if one of the Z series mirrorless bodies might be a better idea, so long as it's at least as good as the D850 in terms of resolution, focusing, etc. I'm wanting to go for the best I can get now, knowing that soon future purchases will be financially constrained by retirement. Thoughts?

(I have already thought about going down my long desired Pentax 645z route, but want to capitalise on existing glass rather than add another brand to my collection (already kitted out with Olympus for weight-constrained use)

 

[SFTPhotography]

Seeing as I'm expecting to be a bit flush soon, I'm toying with adding one more beast to my GAS collection. I have a D500 but with a few full-frame lenses, bought in anticipation of going ff at some point. I'm not interested in changing brand nor replacing glass, and indeed I' pretty much decided on a D850 given current prices, but I am just wondering if one of the Z series mirrorless bodies might be a better idea, so long as it's at least as good as the D850 in terms of resolution, focusing, etc. I'm wanting to go for the best I can get now, knowing that soon future purchases will be financially constrained by retirement. Thoughts?

(I have already thought about going down my long desired Pentax 645z route, but want to capitalise on existing glass rather than add another brand to my collection (already kitted out with Olympus for weight-constrained use)

The D850 is amazing - I have one as well and tbh res wise there's not a lot in it between a 645z and I pixel peep. Lens IQ from the wider Nikon F isn't as good and thats where the 645z stuff scores - the 28-45 etc. But if you're not, then you're not. If you shoot medium to longer FL's the expensive F mount stuff is good enough I reckon.

The Z7, Z7ii share the same sensor as the D850 - so you can use that with the confidence (bar the PDAF banding issue which only occurs with aggressive shadow lifting or shooting into direct light sources) in the same way a D850.

Older lenses need adapted to the Z via an F to Z adapter but they sell on the used section here all the time. The mirrorless design enables using the latest great Z lenses - but will let in more sensor dirt - I find sensor dirt incredibly exaserbating in my processing workflow so for that reason alone I'd want a D850, or the Z9 and it's sensor gaurd design.

I find the larger form and build of the D850 preferable to that of the Z7 - to me, the D850 is a very small camera but when your main camera is a 645z - everything seems small.

My worry, is that the Z7ii will hold its value better than the D850. Mirrorless is being pushed very aggressively and it seems DSLR's are really dying out. I just don't feel the mirrorless is quite mature enough to match my needs and wants. Yours could be different.

 

[woof woof]

Take a hard look at mirrorless

One of the biggest advantages of mirrorless for me is the ability for focus accurately and not only that but consistently accurately anywhere in the frame. Couple this with face/eye detect and this is IMO a real game changer for people pictures as you are much freer to compose the shot how you want and you can concentrate on the composition and capturing the moment and leave the camera to capture focus on your subjects eye.

When shooting generally you can see the exposure and the DoF and you can manually focus very accurately (again, anywhere in the frame) with a magnified view and this is arguably the most accurate way to focus, if you have the time, and as with people pictures you are much freer to compose the shot how you want rather than relying on focus points clustered around the centre of the frame or relying on focus and recompose or post capture cropping.

For focus flexibility, consistency and accuracy and for the benefits of WYSIWYG and the visual aids I think mirrorless is a real step forward and deserves at least a quick look.

 

[fujilover]

Nikon were mastering making dslr`s when they made the d850.

They have a way to go before they master mirrorless, i had a Z6 and did not like it much to be honest.

 

[nandbytes]

I'm a massive EVF fanboi so mirrorless all the way Z-series or wherever brand you choose.

 

[SFTPhotography]

Nikon were mastering making dslr`s when they made the d850.

They have a way to go before they master mirrorless, i had a Z6 and did not like it much to be honest.

I agree. The Z9 shows some promise but the stacked sensor design costs you 1 stop of DR over the D850.

A lot of features from the Z9 will cascade down - namely the bright EVF (I felt the Z7's was a little too dim unlike the latest Sony one) and the sensor gaurd, fully electronic shutter solve a few issues with mirrorless cameras like dirt accumulating on the sensor.

The Z8 will be extremely interesting when that comes out.

 

[dragonfly]

D850 is the sensible choice unless you have money to 'play'.

 

[sk66]

I view the Z7 as about the same as the D850. To me, the primary choices between them are:
Z7- viewfinder live-view/exposure preview, silent shooting with AF, modern lenses
D850- cost, flash compatibility/sync, dual card slots (one SD)

Note that the D850 can also do exposure preview/zoomed focus/focus peaking, and completely silent photography w/ full res raw (focus and exposure locked in burst shooting). It just can't do any of that through the viewfinder.

I have the D5/D850, and there was nothing in the Z line to get me to move until the Z9 came along... mirrorless will be the future and it will be significant in terms of lenses as well. But it is costly. I think the Z9 will cause a number of Z6/Z7 to hit the market at significantly reduced prices. If money doesn't really matter then I would get the Z9; I did, but I'm also keeping my D850.

 

[welshwizard645]

I am looking at a d850 and one of the things holding me back is that dealers are recommending I upgrade my 24-70 lens to the VR as the older model doesn't resolve as well on the 46MP sensor as the new lens does...

Of course, if i have to get the newer lens then getting a Z would be a better 'investment' than the F-mount. Thankfully, my other lenses are 'fine'.

However, my bugbear is that EVF. Still can't get used to it. Other half has just bought herself an R6 to replace 7Dii. Absolutely hateful piece of kit, I really cannot get used to the electronic finder - yes, you can visualize the final image better but I prefer to see what I am photographing. Another issue is that the Z7ii has the interface of the D7*00 series cameras too. I will wait for the technology to develop and see what the Z8 looks like, I can't justify the price tag of the Z9.

 

[lindsay]

The Z9 has me thinking but it is such a price that (a) no way can I afford it and (b) it is way too much camera for a not particularly competent tog like me. Mind you the same is true of the D850, but I can afford it. The Z7ii is tempting, but at a slightly higher price than the 850 and with no intention of adding lenses (at least in the foreseeble) I don't think it offers any advantages that persuade me.

 

[sk66]

I am looking at a d850 and one of the things holding me back is that dealers are recommending I upgrade my 24-70 lens to the VR as the older model doesn't resolve as well on the 46MP sensor as the new lens does...

Actually, the G lens resolves notably more in the center of frame than the new E version does (~ the same near edges). But neither resolves close to the 46mp the D850 is capable of (~ 20MP).
I wouldn't worry about it...

 

[Kiwi Paul]

I personally prefer the OVF over the EVF. I have a Nikon F4, F6, D780 and soon to arrive D500, I love the ergonomics and handling of the cameras so can't really see any reason to get a Z7 etc.
I don't know if the FTZ adaptor controls the aperture on non "E" lenses (lenses with electronic aperture as opposed to the mechanical aperture control on the pre "E" lenses) either, maybe someone can advise.
The AF and AF-D series lenses that use the motor in the camera to focus won't auto focus with an FTZ adapter either but I don't know what existing lenses you have.

 

[Mike.P]

I prefer a OVF over a EVF but prefer what you get with a EVF over an OVF

 

[nandbytes]

I prefer a OVF over a EVF but prefer what you get with a EVF over an OVF

buy one if fuji X100 series and forget the rest

 

[Jim_Tod]

I have a D850 and was looking at a second. I ended up getting a z7 with ftz instead. The z7 is my main landscape capera now. I love that what you see is what you get in terms of exposure, etc

i find the controls a little more tricky to get used to, sensor gets dirtier quicker and its clearly a prosumer rather than pro level body but on balance i’m more confident with the image before pressing the shutter

both cameras are great but if i was starting today i think it would be mirrorless

 

[sk66]

I love that what you see is what you get in terms of exposure, etc

You do know you can do the same with the D850 don't you? For landscape photography I would be 90+ % on a tripod using the liveview tilt screen anyway.

The new large lens mounts is allowing lens designs which are sharper farther into the corners, so I can see that being a significant advantage to the Z7 for landscape photography... you just need to pay up a bit more

 

[welshwizard645]

Actually, the G lens resolves notably more in the center of frame than the new E version does (~ the same near edges). But neither resolves close to the 46mp the D850 is capable of (~ 20MP).
I wouldn't worry about it...

Thanks for sharing that. just a shame the D850 wasn't in stock during the recent promotion, at least I can stick with the G for a little while longer....

 

[Jim_Tod]

You do know you can do the same with the D850 don't you? For landscape photography I would be 90+ % on a tripod using the liveview tilt screen anyway.

The new large lens mounts is allowing lens designs which are sharper farther into the corners, so I can see that being a significant advantage to the Z7 for landscape photography... you just need to pay up a bit more

I do know that about the d850 in live view but prefer that the z7 just does it rather than needing additional buttons pressed

the lens i was most interestedin, the 14-30 appears to get very mixed reviews about corner sharpness. When they fix that i’ll have a look at z mount. Until then the lenses that were good enough for the d850 will have to do

 

[SFTPhotography]

I do know that about the d850 in live view but prefer that the z7 just does it rather than needing additional buttons pressed

the lens i was most interestedin, the 14-30 appears to get very mixed reviews about corner sharpness. When they fix that i’ll have a look at z mount. Until then the lenses that were good enough for the d850 will have to do

14-24 Z mount would be THE one. Or a 20mm F1.8 on Z or F.

What are the Z 24-70 F2.8's like in terms of corner sharpnes over the new VR lens. I had the old G and got rid of it for unacceptable corner sharpness. The E trades some centre sharpness for overall uniform sharpness - which for someone like me seems ideal.

Anyone got notes on how the Z version measures up.

, sensor gets dirtier quicker

How much quicker in reality - keeping the same lens on usually solves a lot of issues in this regard? Or is it really terrible anyway

 

[nandbytes]

What are the Z 24-70 F2.8's like in terms of corner sharpnes over the new VR lens. I had the old G and got rid of it for unacceptable corner sharpness. The E trades some centre sharpness for overall uniform sharpness - which for someone like me seems ideal.

Its supposedly the sharpest 24-70mm lens you can get on any mount or brand.

 

[SFTPhotography]

Its supposedly the sharpest 24-70mm lens you can get on any mount or brand.

Interesting. I need something like this to fly to Patagonia with at some stage.

 

[SFTPhotography]

Further post

Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S Review - Page 3 of 6

A hands-on lab review of the Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S, a professional midrange zoom for Nikon's mirrorless system. See how it measures up.

photographylife.com

My taking from this...

If you have an old G lens - the Z version owns the sh*t out of it everywhere.

If you have a new E lens and mainly shoot stopped down - the E actually out performs the Z version, very slightly, at smaller apertures only (F11 or narrower) - at wider ones - the Z owns the living sh*t out of it too.

So the Z is definately the best one as an all rounder.

But if one has an E version, shoots landscapes - they'd be served better with an FTZ and keeping their older lens.

**Remember - this is their first tilt at a 24-70 F2.8 lens on the Z**. Invariably there will be a further one a few years down the line - which will probably be better.

 

[nandbytes]

Interesting. I need something like this to fly to Patagonia with at some stage.

Thought you were looking at sony

All mirrorless systems have good lenses. Really depends on what you are after, I suggest look at the lenses first then body.

I have personally decided to travel with just two lenses later in the year - 16-35mm f2.8 + 35-150mm f2-2.8.

 

[SFTPhotography]

Thought you were looking at sony

All mirrorless systems have good lenses. Really depends on what you are after, I suggest look at the lenses first then body.

I have personally decided to travel with just two lenses later in the year - 16-35mm f2.8 + 35-150mm f2-2.8.

I am keeping an open mind. All I know is I just about got a D800 and 24-70 into carry on - a 645z etc has not a prayer of going anywhere other than the hold - which fills me with horror.

A7R4a did impress me - EVF a lot better than the Z7 - but menues etc reassuringly familiar. I think there's a lot to cascade down from the Z9 to the future Z8 that will make a nice 35mm format mirrorless camera.

**Edit - with Sony the GM 24-70 2.8 is getting long in the tooth** - something newer is probably coming there.

 

[nandbytes]

I am keeping an open mind. All I know is I just about got a D800 and 24-70 into carry on - a 645z etc has not a prayer of going anywhere other than the hold - which fills me with horror.

A7R4a did impress me - EVF a lot better than the Z7 - but menues etc reassuringly familiar. I think there's a lot to cascade down from the Z9 to the future Z8 that will make a nice 35mm format mirrorless camera.

I don't think there'll be a Z8. I wouldn't hold my breath for it anyway.

if you don't mind primes you can get some rather small primes these days. For example Sigma 20mm f2, 24mm f2 or f3.5, 35mm f2, 45mm f2.8, 65mm f2, 90mm f2.8 (available for both e-mount and L-mount). More options on e-mount but just giving you ideas for the plane instead of a big heavy 24-70/2.8.

 

[SFTPhotography]

I don't think there'll be a Z8. I wouldn't hold my breath for it anyway.

if you don't mind primes you can get some rather small primes these days. For example Sigma 20mm f2, 24mm f2 or f3.5, 35mm f2, 45mm f2.8, 65mm f2, 90mm f2.8 (available for both e-mount and L-mount). More options on e-mount but just giving you ideas for the plane instead of a big heavy 24-70/2.8.

I think there will be.

Z9 is like D6 equivalent - fully pro sports body with vertical grip and Nikon "pro" layout.
Z8 would be like D850 replacement - resolution oriented (read 61mp to differentiate it from the 45mp z9) - minus the intergrated grip, similar AF, smaller buffer to Z9, lower frame rate - and with some features of a Nikon "pro" layout. Hopefully, it'll get that sensor gaurd, snazzy EVF from the Z9....
Z7 is like D780 - amateur/entry level 35mm camera with lower res.

 

[nandbytes]

I think there will be.

You have a bet, your 2p against mine

Z9 is like D6 equivalent - fully pro sports body with vertical grip and Nikon "pro" layout.
Z8 would be like D850 replacement - resolution oriented (read 61mp to differentiate it from the 45mp z9) - minus the intergrated grip, similar AF, smaller buffer to Z9, lower frame rate - and with some features of a Nikon "pro" layout. Hopefully, it'll get that sensor gaurd, snazzy EVF from the Z9....
Z7 is like D780 - amateur/entry level 35mm camera with lower res.

I'm sure I've had this chat before but not sure if it's with you or someone else

D6 = Z9
D8xx = Z7
D7xx = Z6
D6xx = Z5

If there is a Z8 it will most likely be a R3/A9 style lower Res stacked sensor body. Not what you are thinking with high Res.

If there is a 60mp style high Res body it'll likely be a Z7iii

That's my 2p...

 

[SFTPhotography]

You have a bet, your 2p against mine

I'm sure I've had this chat before but not sure if it's with you or someone else

D6 = Z9
D8xx = Z7
D7xx = Z6
D6xx = Z5

If there is a Z8 it will most likely be a R3/A9 style lower Res stacked sensor body. Not what you are thinking with high Res.

If there is a 60mp style high Res body it'll likely be a Z7iii

That's my 2p...

Z7iii might well lose the PASM dial and gain the Z9's 4 button layout up top - and gain a nicer EVF/sensor gaurd. They could call it Z8...I hope it comes. It's the mirrorless camera a lot would love. I don't need a PASM dial - never used it on the 645z but because of the depth of the body a lot of buttons could be fitted ontop of the mirrorbox area. A D850 etc is too small for this layout - and a Z series smaller again.

 

[dragonfly]

The Z9 has me thinking but it is such a price that (a) no way can I afford it and (b) it is way too much camera for a not particularly competent tog like me. Mind you the same is true of the D850, but I can afford it. The Z7ii is tempting, but at a slightly higher price than the 850 and with no intention of adding lenses (at least in the foreseeble) I don't think it offers any advantages that persuade me.

I haven't seen a compelling Z body until the 9. But I really do see it as more of an action cam i.e. for sports and wildlife photographers. I'm not sure that many of the new owners will capitalise on its best features. Of course, if money is no object...

 

[LongLensPhotography]

I'm rather shocked to see that even mega expensive z9 features a very low Res 3mp evf. A1 is like on 9. Is that a joke Nikon?
If I had f mount glass I would be looking for a bargain d850 or even d810 depending on your position

 

[Sky]

No contest at all - a D850.

 

[nandbytes]

I'm rather shocked to see that even mega expensive z9 features a very low Res 3mp evf. A1 is like on 9. Is that a joke Nikon?
If I had f mount glass I would be looking for a bargain d850 or even d810 depending on your position

A1 drops the resolution when your are shooting/bursting or if you use 240Hz refresh rate.
You only take get 5.6mp realistically speaking but at 0.9x magnification @120hz refresh rate

With Z9 you get 3.6mp @ 60hz with no resolution drop while shooting/bursting.

If you are shooting landscapes only then you can get 9mp with 60hz on A1 but why would buy it for just that?

Z9 is also a fair bit cheaper than A1

 

[LongLensPhotography]

A1 drops the resolution when your are shooting/bursting or if you use 240Hz refresh rate.
You only take get 5.6mp realistically speaking but at 0.9x magnification @120hz refresh rate

With Z9 you get 3.6mp @ 60hz with no resolution drop while shooting/bursting.

If you are shooting landscapes only then you can get 9mp with 60hz on A1 but why would buy it for just that?

Z9 is also a fair bit cheaper than A1

Right, that sounds pretty lame all round but even then A1 still handily beats Z9 in that department. Slight improvements in sensor tech mean nothing when you can't compose properly. They all need some sort of tethering solution to be fair for static work.

P.S. If you are shooting handheld even a static subject you really want 240Hz, or bare minimum 120. Only on tripod you can drop it to whatever. And you want Full HD res minium too which Z9 is not even close!

 

[nandbytes]

even then A1 still handily beats Z9 in that department.

For a lot more money yes.

P.S. If you are shooting handheld even a static subject you really want 240Hz, or bare minimum 120. Only on tripod you can drop it to whatever. And you want Full HD res minium too which Z9 is not even close!

I can't really tell the difference tbh between 120hz and 240hz.

Right, that sounds pretty lame all round

At least it's not an OVF

 

[LongLensPhotography]

At least it's not an OVF

I just wonder how do we survive in the real world with analog eyes and no EVF!

For a lot more money yes.

That's the point. They can all shove their half baked overpriced tech you know where.

 

[woof woof]

I just wonder how do we survive in the real world with analog eyes and no EVF!

You'll survive it's just that if you're using a DSLR or other unaided optical system your lenses may need micro adjust and even then the focus could be hit and miss if you look close enough and you'll never be able to manually focus as accurately with any unaided optical system as you will with the magnified view of mirrorless.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

You'll survive it's just that if you're using a DSLR or other unaided optical system your lenses may need micro adjust and even then the focus could be hit and miss if you look close enough and you'll never be able to manually focus as accurately with any unaided optical system as you will with the magnified view of mirrorless.

Live view with accurate af has been available for a decade now in DSLRs so really no excuse not to use that when on tripod to fine-tune focus and eliminate the shutter slap induced shake. Evf doesn't add anything new here, it rather takes away ability to make initial composition the normal way unhindered by low quality digital filter.
Besides what is the situation again with strobes in dark room and weak or no modelling lights? Iso 100 f9 1/160 in dark place... Last time I had that situation live view was completely black; will evf fare much better? No problems with ovf there. Focus worked just fine too.

 

[sk66]

I'm rather shocked to see that even mega expensive z9 features a very low Res 3mp evf. A1 is like on 9.

Actually, the EVF and LCD specs are given in "dots," not pixels/MP. Dots are the individual LEDs (R/G/B) whereas it requires one of each to make up a pixel; divide by 3 if you want MP's.

So yeah, ~1MP on that tiny screen. It still results in a DPI much greater than you can see... hell, most images you view on here are at ~1MP and about 8" across (1024x @ typical screen resolution).
A viewfinder isn't really suitable for anything critical either way... especially if you have older eyes than a teenager. Maybe zoomed in on an EVF would be better for focus, but I'd rather be using the LCD or external monitor. And what is the refresh rate of your monitor? Probably 50/60Hz... a static subject doesn't require any refresh rate for the content being displayed.

 

[sk66]

Besides what is the situation again with strobes in dark room and weak or no modelling lights? Last time I had that situation live view was completely black; will evf fare much better? No problems with ovf there.

EVF (and live view) can fare much better than an OVF in dim light, by showing you the exposure preview (ISO amplified signal). There are plenty of times where I am only using the OVF to roughly compose an image and put focus points on subject.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

EVF (and live view) can fare much better than an OVF in dim light, by showing you the exposure preview (ISO amplified signal). There are plenty of times where I am only using the OVF to roughly compose an image and put focus points on subject.

Genuine question. Does it know that ISO100 f/9 1/160 is a completely 'wrong' setting for preview because it only works with flash burst on? I needs to be at ridiculous ISO to maintain f/9 if so, or what does it do? Stays black like my LCD I presume.

So yeah, ~1MP on that tiny screen. It still results in a DPI much greater than you can see... hell, most images you view on here are at ~1MP and about 8" across (1024x @ typical screen resolution).

1MP and tiny are a very bad combination. When you look at the monitor you are sitting back. A long way back. And normally look at an image way bigger than 8" hopefully if you are working on it. I bought 32" screen for a reason.
I'm just saying it doesn't work for me. Because I will have to look at the scene with naked eyes and then just point in the general direction. That's going way backwards.

And what is the refresh rate of your monitor? Probably 50/60Hz... a static subject doesn't require any refresh rate for the content being displayed.

Yes, It could be 30 for all I care. Because monitor is static, subject is static, and presumably the tethered camera is already static on tripod. If it is handheld NOTHING is static any more. It actually becomes very dynamic. And that EVF just goes blurry till you steady your hand to tripod level. Z7 was horrible experience to be quite honest.